Now this is where you make yourself look foolish, because a discount from Ricambi is FChat's worst kept secret. Ricambi offers a discount to all FChat members.
Are you guys Dumb and Dumber? He offered the discount code to an FChat member, who already received a discount by being an FChat member. Then you respond by saying not everyone is an FChat member? Talk about self-ownage - you two lead in that category.
Everybody, I am wrong and Watson is absolutely right. Please give credence to the member with the CREEPY CLOWN AVATAR.
NormalGuySupercar Dan has his own discount code all be it different than the FChat discount code. Remember there are Ferrari owners and future Ferrari owners that do not have membership to FCA or a log in to FChat. It is for this reason Dan at Ricambi America decided to create another discount code especially for NormalGuySupercar. He also did it to track how much new business he gets from NormalGuySupercar’s Subscribers. Why I or anyone needs to explain this in explicit detail is beyond me. It is soo different even a small child would understand. Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat
Stuart, There's been plenty of give and take on the issue of name-calling, but it's a bit much to send me PMs to reign in other members while your own insults go unabated. I think it best for all concerned to let it go - tomorrow is another day. Fred and Stuart, To clear up any misconceptions you have about Dan's 3-day ban (now expired), that was the third time his profile was sanitized by mods for commercial links - it was applied for no other reason. He was fully aware of our advertising rules after prior warnings and even mentioned them in a recent video. If he repeats the transgression, the mod response will escalate. He doesn't have to opt for sponsorship if he doesn't think it's a viable option for his business, but he can't advertise his business on FerrariChat without sponsorship. It's that simple. As for both of you, you've had your say extolling the virtues of Dan, the value you ascribe to his channel, and have been permitted to put up a continued defence for him. Neither of you are casual fans recommending a channel but are friends of Dan and cannot promote his channel for him as his representatives without a sponsorship arrangement (which Dan declined to even enquire about). Future promotional occurrences will be regarded as prohibited commercial activity by shills and will be moderated accordingly. For everyone, I think this topic has been exhausted tonight, so the thread is closed pending review from the mod team to decide if/when it would be appropriate to reopen it. All the best, Andrew.
After conducting a review of the thread, here are the thoughts of the moderation team: 1) The thread was created by a FerrariChat member offering legitimate commentary on the value of a YouTube video/channel. We're not going to shut that down or sanitize the comments. 2) When a FerrariChat member has complained about something offsite, we've always allowed the offsite party and their affiliates to respond to the complaints as a matter of fairness. Again, this was permitted in this thread: see posts by @dhurlbert, @Fred Daniali, and @F1Spider, to name the most vociferous of the channel's defenders. 3) Stuart (@F1Spider) and Fred (@Fred Daniali) have demonstrated that they're affiliated with Dan (@dhurlbert) and both have undertaken considerable efforts to promote his channel on FerrariChat as shills. Despite being categorized as shills, they've been allowed to post in defense of Dan because of our fairness policy - this will continue providing they adhere to our rules. In addition to the language/attack rules, clarification is needed on referencing elements of the advert or commercial activity as part of the defense - this is permitted to a limited extent, but comprehensive promotion and further commercial activity is prohibited. This is akin to "fair use" doctrine in copyright law; cite only what you need to support your point and no more. 4) Much leeway has been given on both sides regarding language/attack rules. There will be no further leeway going forward on any side of the debate weighing the value of the channel under discussion. If you choose to engage in the debate, you must regulate your tone or the moderators will intervene. The thread has been reopened. It is expected that the tone be much more civil from all parties. All the best, Andrew.
Andrew, is this the following address where a representative of your company is able to personally receive mail: 10130 PERIMETER PKWY SUITE 200 CHARLOTTE, NC 28216 Thank you, Fred Daniali
I have no idea. I'm a volunteer moderator and not involved on the business side. I suggest using the contact form to get in touch with the administrators to ask them. All the best, Andrew.
And although you are a volunteer, are you considered an official affiliate and representative of "Ferrarichat"?
I am a volunteer moderator who assists the community by enforcing the site rules. I do not get paid, have no contract, and am not an employee. I suspect you want to talk to someone who is an employee and who does represent FerrariChat as a business. Click here to send them a message: contact us. All the best, Andrew.
I am just respectfully asking you to answer the question with a simple yes or no. I was not asking for clarification of your duties.
I'm a volunteer moderator. That is a defined, well-accepted, specific position that is distinct from an affiliate or representative. I cannot speak for FerrariChat as a business and do not take business decisions - you'll need to talk to the administrators via the contact form to speak to a business representative. All the best, Andrew.
It seems that they give you the ability to reprimand or enforce the rules? Is the outcome of these skirmishes your sole decision or must you collaborate with an official affiliate or representative of "Ferrarichat"?
I thought you didn't want a clarification of my duties. Make up your mind. If you want to discuss site administration and definition of everyone's roles, you should talk to the administrators via the contact us form. I'm not going to spend any further time volunteering to answer a bunch of pedantic questions that seemingly have no point to them. All the best, Andrew.